4.5 Article

MDCT urography of upper tract urothelial neoplasms

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY
卷 184, 期 6, 页码 1873-1881

出版社

AMER ROENTGEN RAY SOC
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.184.6.01841873

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to review the MDCT urography appearance of pathologically proven transitional cell carcinomas of the renal collecting system and ureter and to correlate the MDCT urography findings with pathology findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Of 370 MDCT urography examinations performed over an 18-month period, 1:3 patients were diagnosed with 27 renal collecting system or ureteral urothelial neoplasms at endoscopic biopsy (n = 8) or surgery (n = 19). Initial MDCT reports were reviewed to determine the sensitivity of original reviewers in detecting these neoplasms. Two radiologists also retrospectively reviewed these scans and characterized the CT appearance of the neoplasms on both axial CT and 3D reformatted images. Findings at retrospective review were correlated with pathology results to determine whether any CT features could be used to predict tumor grade. RESULTS. Eighteen of 27 neoplasms were prospectively identified on MDCT urography, and an additional six neoplasms were detected on retrospective review. Three ureteral neoplasms could not be visualized. The 24 retrospectively detected neoplasms had three distinct MDCT appearances: circumferential urothelial wall thickening (n = 14), small masses (! 5 mm in maximal diameter) (n = 5), and large masses (> 5 mm in maximal diameter) (n = 5). All detected lesions could be seen on axial excretory phase images provided wide window settings were reviewed; however, only six were detected on 3D reconstructions. MDCT urography appearance did not correlate with tumor grade. CONCLUSION. MDCT urography is a promising technique for detecting upper urinary tract neoplasms. The static 3D reconstructions used in this study are insufficient for visualization. Axial image review remains essential for tumor identification.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据